ejaculation=prostate health

It has long been thought that men who have frequent sex in whatever form have lower risk of prostate cancer than those who do not. When prostate cancer was relatively rare this did not seem of much note, but now it is not rare so part of genital health for those with or without large equipment like us need to take whatever precautions we can. Studies now suggest that frequent ejaculation by purging the prostate gland may keep cancer causing substances from building up in the prostate. What do you think about this from your readings? Also of note is suggestion by some in the literature that self massage to regularly completely empty all prostatic fluid also may reduce the chances of prostatitis and maybe cancer. Here&#39;s the problem. The method suggested seems to me possible only for gymnasts. One must insert the middle finger in the rectum from behind so that finger is arched downward and can be used forcefully to massage the prostate and force all the fluid out of it. Try as hard as I have I cannot quite get the finger in at that angle. From the front is worthless since you cannot get the proper leverage to force all fluid out of all the lobes of the prostate. Do you think this is just hokum and cannot regular ejaculation do as much purging as this contortionist stunt?

Gold Member

Actually, it was long belived that increased sex caused higher rates of prostate cancer (just as it has from time to time been blamed for increasing cervical cancer risk in women), and only recenltly proven that the opposite is true. Michael Leitzmann of the Nation Cancer Institute started out to test this theory that too much sex could lead to increased risk of prostate cancer. The supposed increase in risk was due to various infections (including minor ones not recognized as STDs) which could be induced by frequent sex. What they found was quite the opposite, that frequent sex presented no increase in risk, but rather actually appeared beneficial. Compared to the reference group who ejaculated four to seven times a month, "each increase of three ejaculations per week was associated with a 15 per cent decrease in the risk of prostate cancer", says Leitzmann. "More than 12 ejaculations per month would start conferring the benefit - on average every second day or so," he says. However, while the findings are statistically significant, Leitzmann remains cautious. "I don&#39;t believe at this point our research would warrant suggesting men should alter their sexual behaviour in order to modify their risk." You can read more about this research in the New Scientist, at http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4861

A different investigative team in Australia, led by Graham Giles of The Cancer Council Victoria in Melbourne, approached the same topic. However, they chose to investigate masturbation, since this removed the element of possible infections due to sex, and therefore might show an even greater benefit. The team concludes that the more men ejaculate between the ages of 20 and 50, the less likely they are to develop prostate cancer. The research found the protective effect of masturbation is greatest while men are in their twenties: those who had ejaculated more than five times per week in their twenties, for instance, were one-third less likely to develop aggressive prostate cancer later in life (BJU International, vol 92, p 211). The team speculates that ejaculation prevents carcinogens building up in the gland. You can read more about this work here: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3942

However, while keeping the prostate flushed out, so to speak, seems to be healthy, I&#39;m not sure that forcing the fluid out by unnatural means would be a good idea. In some men, it is possible to induce a natural ejaculation quite rapidly by gently stimulating the prostate with the finger. This would seem to be a healthy and perhaps time-saving alternative to jerking off. I suspect this is what is meant by self-massage. In men that can ejaculate this way, this does not require a large force to be applied to the prostate, but just gentle stimulation. Therefore, the comment about needing "leverage" seems out of place. It is also possible to eject fluid from the prostate by the application of large amounts of unnatural force, without producing the normal orgasmic contraction of the muscles. However, I don&#39;t think this is what the proponents of prostate massage meant, as this would seem likely to eventually cause injury. I would think that more frequent draining by natural means would be better than less frequent forcefull unnatural expression of the fluid.

Gold Member

Originally posted by ericbear@Mar 3 2005, 02:01 AMActually, it was long belived that increased sex caused higher rates of prostate cancer (just as it has from time to time been blamed for increasing cervical cancer risk in women), and only recenltly proven that the opposite is true. Michael Leitzmann of the Nation Cancer Institute started out to test this theory that too much sex could lead to increased risk of prostate cancer. The supposed increase in risk was due to various infections (including minor ones not recognized as STDs) which could be induced by frequent sex. What they found was quite the opposite, that frequent sex presented no increase in risk, but rather actually appeared beneficial. Compared to the reference group who ejaculated four to seven times a month, "each increase of three ejaculations per week was associated with a 15 per cent decrease in the risk of prostate cancer", says Leitzmann. "More than 12 ejaculations per month would start conferring the benefit - on average every second day or so," he says. However, while the findings are statistically significant, Leitzmann remains cautious. "I don&#39;t believe at this point our research would warrant suggesting men should alter their sexual behaviour in order to modify their risk." You can read more about this research in the New Scientist, at http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4861

The forceful massage I think was suggested because it apparently takes more than a gentle push to squeeze all the fluid out of the prostate and having tried this from the front I can see that all you can do that way is gently poke, but maybe that is just me. Anyway your readings confirm that it does seem to be beneficial to ejaculate often with or without the extra fluid voiding produced from the thorough purging action of a rear anal entry massage. Thanks.

A different investigative team in Australia, led by Graham Giles of The Cancer Council Victoria in Melbourne, approached the same topic. However, they chose to investigate masturbation, since this removed the element of possible infections due to sex, and therefore might show an even greater benefit. The team concludes that the more men ejaculate between the ages of 20 and 50, the less likely they are to develop prostate cancer. The research found the protective effect of masturbation is greatest while men are in their twenties: those who had ejaculated more than five times per week in their twenties, for instance, were one-third less likely to develop aggressive prostate cancer later in life (BJU International, vol 92, p 211). The team speculates that ejaculation prevents carcinogens building up in the gland. You can read more about this work here: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3942

However, while keeping the prostate flushed out, so to speak, seems to be healthy, I&#39;m not sure that forcing the fluid out by unnatural means would be a good idea. In some men, it is possible to induce a natural ejaculation quite rapidly by gently stimulating the prostate with the finger. This would seem to be a healthy and perhaps time-saving alternative to jerking off. I suspect this is what is meant by self-massage. In men that can ejaculate this way, this does not require a large force to be applied to the prostate, but just gentle stimulation. Therefore, the comment about needing "leverage" seems out of place. It is also possible to eject fluid from the prostate by the application of large amounts of unnatural force, without producing the normal orgasmic contraction of the muscles. However, I don&#39;t think this is what the proponents of prostate massage meant, as this would seem likely to eventually cause injury. I would think that more frequent draining by natural means would be better than less frequent forcefull unnatural expression of the fluid.

Gold Member

I am glad that others have given the research information about this. I read all of that info in the paper but didn&#39;t remember the source. Earlier when I posted, some questined it. I am glad we have the actual study quoted. Guys will be more apt to follow it now. And yes, I have had to masturbate before myself for the same reason.

My first post&#33; This reminds me of watching this report on tv with my now exwife. It said that lack of sex causes prostate cancer, I turned to her and said, so that&#39;s it you&#39;re trying to kill me. LOL

Thanks to all you men and your affirmation of disease avoidance benefits of frequent ejaculation, I hope to continue ejaculating as frequently as possible. No one commented positively on the finger massage method of completely emptying the prostate so maybe that is left only to the contortionists to perform. Since you fellas of extraordinary length seem more highly sexed anyway that shouldn&#39;t be too heavy a burden to bear to save yourselves from the extreme discomfort of prostatitis or even enlarged prostate (friends of mine can barely urinate with it) and life threatening prospects of prostate cancer. Keep ejaculating and often.

Gold Member

Originally posted by Overhung@Mar 11 2005, 12:53 AM>My first post&#33; This reminds me of watching this report on tv with my now exwife. It said that lack of sex causes prostate cancer, I turned to her and said, so that&#39;s it you&#39;re trying to kill me. LOL

[post=290043]Quoted post[/post]​

Click to expand...

Hey that&#39;s a good one&#33;

As a victim of Prostate Cancer, I would believe somewhat regular orgasms would have a minor beneficial effect on your avoidance chances.

But there are other factors.

While my frequency was not necessarily above average except in early teen years, I did manage to quite regularly have orgasms, of course giving a hand when the wife wasn&#39;t amenable or available.

Now maybe if I had this information by age 20 and opportunity to pursue it properly- &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

BTW, I sure hope they can come up with better approach to a cure. Currently they either castrate you chemically or physically or remove the prostate.

Sex without a prostate gives you about 1/3 the orgasm satisfaction you have with one. The prostate is part muscle and enforces both the erection itself and the ejaculation. If you are lucky enough to not be completely impotent you may well end up with about 2 throbs&#33; But no mess&#33;

Also when you have a prostate the refilling of the prostate between encounters provides a lot ot that "I gotta have it feeling&#33;"

Other bad news- my RP was 14 years ago- but I cannot be considered for sure "Cured" .

Originally posted by Hal8053+Mar 17 2005, 10:04 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hal8053 &#064; Mar 17 2005, 10:04 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Overhung@Mar 11 2005, 12:53 AM>My first post&#33;Â This reminds me of watching this report on tv with my now exwife. It said that lack of sex causes prostate cancer, I turned to her and said, so that&#39;s it you&#39;re trying to kill me. LOL

[post=290043]Quoted post[/post]​

Click to expand...

Hey that&#39;s a good one&#33;

As a victim of Prostate Cancer, I would believe somewhat regular orgasms would have a minor beneficial effect on your avoidance chances.

But there are other factors.

While my frequency was not necessarily above average except in early teen years, I did manage to quite regularly have orgasms, of course giving a hand when the wife wasn&#39;t amenable or available.

Now maybe if I had this information by age 20 and opportunity to pursue it properly- &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

BTW, I sure hope they can come up with better approach to a cure. Currently they either castrate you chemically or physically or remove the prostate.

Sex without a prostate gives you about 1/3 the orgasm satisfaction you have with one. The prostate is part muscle and enforces both the erection itself and the ejaculation. If you are lucky enough to not be completely impotent you may well end up with about 2 throbs&#33; But no mess&#33;

Also when you have a prostate the refilling of the prostate between encounters provides a lot ot that "I gotta have it feeling&#33;"

Other bad news- my RP was 14 years ago- but I cannot be considered for sure "Cured" .

[post=291821]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

Thank you for honestly revealing the pain and some of the suffering that has resulted from your cancer and hopefully giving us the strength of purpose to do whatever we can to prevent it happening to us.

Perhaps by regular ejaculations you were able to postpone the onset of your prostate cancer or lessen its severity. In any event, I can think of very few pleasurable activities that have as a benefit, delay or prevention of a cancer. So many posts are rather superficial in this site as one expect since men are often rather protective of their inner feelings about their vulnerabilities but yours was quite uplifting to me. A site devoted to large penises seems at first glance such a trite venture, but I think any venue in which to gather a group that have some commonality (even a larger penis) is a good excuse to get to know other men, many needing an anonymous discussion group. I am happy to be a member even if membership reasonably expects you to have problems with a very large penis. Thanks for adding an extraordinarily serious message to the postings.

Gold Member

Originally posted by motlissof@Mar 3 2005, 05:26 AMIt has long been thought that men who have frequent sex in whatever form have lower risk of prostate cancer than those who do not. When prostate cancer was relatively rare this did not seem of much note, but now it is not rare so part of genital health for those with or without large equipment like us need to take whatever precautions we can. Studies now suggest that frequent ejaculation by purging the prostate gland may keep cancer causing substances from building up in the prostate. What do you think about this from your readings? Also of note is suggestion by some in the literature that self massage to regularly completely empty all prostatic fluid also may reduce the chances of prostatitis and maybe cancer. Here&#39;s the problem. The method suggested seems to me possible only for gymnasts. One must insert the middle finger in the rectum from behind so that finger is arched downward and can be used forcefully to massage the prostate and force all the fluid out of it. Try as hard as I have I cannot quite get the finger in at that angle. From the front is worthless since you cannot get the proper leverage to force all fluid out of all the lobes of the prostate. Do you think this is just hokum and cannot regular ejaculation do as much purging as this contortionist stunt?

[post=287938]Quoted post[/post]​

Click to expand...

No, this is not hokum, it really works, but since everyone&#39;s built different, I would suggest having your partner do it for you. It doesn&#39;t matter which finger they use, the prostate gland can easily be found, it feels like a small round ball inside the anus and rubbing it will cause it to tighten up, which is very exciting. The ejaculations that result from this kind of stimulation will be like nothing you&#39;ve ever felt&#33;

ps, if you don&#39;t currently have a partner, try a small vibrator, that should do the trick.

Originally posted by carolinacurious@Mar 19 2005, 06:39 PMI&#39;ve never used this device, but supposedly it can be used both for really incredible orgasms as well as prostatic release without orgasm (perfect for chastity and edger-philes).

Available from many places, medical and sexually oriented, here&#39;s one at random:

And TRANCE: No, nobody&#39;s kidding, this topic also comes up fairly often. Cum already and make it a habit.

[post=292275]Quoted post[/post]​

Click to expand...

Well since I have been taking yoga classes for several months I tried to backwards entrance method (disgusting I know, but....) and could barely get the middle finger in there but not far enough to do any good. From the front you just cannot achieve sufficient downward pressure. I hate to order one of these things, but if it will give an extra measure of protection from prostate disease why not. Thanks for your honest and knowledgeable opinions on this important subject.

Gold Member

Glad to help. If you get one I would be curious to know of your experience. It&#39;s always been curious to me that the medical sites sell it for men who either can&#39;t or won&#39;t expel prostate fluid the "normal" way, but of course don&#39;t talk about the orgasmic effects.

And the sex sites either sell it as a way to have "mind blowing" orgasms, better than ever before or as a "chastity helper" device, "Now your mistress can deny you orgasm for months without that unsightly prostate buildup."